The Put Up or Shut Up Argument in Gun Control

This is a discussion on The Put Up or Shut Up Argument in Gun Control within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; "Hunters have been quietly donating tons of meat to organizations that feed the hungry for an unspoken number of years. Groups like Hunters Harvest and ...

The Put Up or Shut Up Argument in Gun Control

"Hunters have been quietly donating tons of meat to organizations that feed the hungry for an unspoken number of years. Groups like Hunters Harvest and Hunters for Hungry have been gathering meat donations from hunters via local processing plants. In one year 2011 -2012, 99 meat processors working with Hunters for Hungry provided 152,962 pounds of meat to agencies that feed the hungry."

"A heavily armed citizenry is not about overthrowing the government; it is about preventing the government from overthrowing liberty. A people stripped of their right of self defense is defenseless against their own government." -source

I believe the author is going more for, who really has the moral high ground here? I didn't get the impression he thought the 2A was about hunting, more that gun owners are more responsible citizens who actually contribute than a lot of their statist opponents are.

I believe the author is going more for, who really has the moral high ground here? I didn't get the impression he thought the 2A was about hunting, more that gun owners are more responsible citizens who actually contribute than a lot of their statist opponents are.

That was what I took from the article and was surprised to get the negative responses. Anything positive about firearms is a good story.

No scentific basis for the authors statements. The article has nothing to do with 2A. The author is trying to say that hunters live on a higher moral plane their anti's...which I disagree with. Why doesn't he just say hunters do a good thing and leave it at that.

No scentific basis for the authors statements. The article has nothing to do with 2A. The author is trying to say that hunters live on a higher moral plane their anti's...which I disagree with. Why doesn't he just say hunters do a good thing and leave it at that.

Because antis are the spawn from the pit of hell? It may not actually be fact but it seems reasonable to me.

I have heard of some anti's getting the health department involved and got over a ton of meat thrown in a dumpster and covered in bleach! It was all meat donated by hunters and processed commercially. They said there were health concerns. The homeless had been eating the donated meat for years!!! Never one problem. It was a travesty and they should have been ashamed of themselves for destroying meat donated legally.

I disagree sir. Your theory implies a level of intelligence not found in a single cell organism. Antis are incapable of thought.

Please, let's not insult the amoebas by comparing them with the anti crowd. Antis are absolutely capable of thought. They THINK gun owners are evil, dangerous people who are a threat to society at large. They THINK cosmetic furniture makes a rifle more dangerous, especially if it's black. They THINK it's legal to hunt humans. They THINK by banning guns the criminals will be magically deterred from committing violent crimes. They THINK it's a far better idea to piss or vomit on your attacker. They THINK "assault rifles" are capable of shooting down aircraft. The lunacy doesn't seem to have an end and I could do this all day. They think, even if their thoughts are beyond irrational.